The Big Scary Evolution Monster

[Digit]

Hello all, this is my first post in this forum.

I've been thinking a lot recently about origins, and the two opposite sides, and also that fuzzy sort of 'in-the-middle' side and how they fit into our beliefs. I'm speaking about Evoltuion, Creationism and Theistic Evolution.

I cannot understand how some people can take the account in Genesis as figurative. I think my main issue with this, is that God not only tells us that He created these things in a period of time, he then defines that time period as a day, and gives it a real world length. It has a morning and an evening. There is nothing in that which can be taken figurativly as far as I can tell. It is a literal account.

In fact, I would rather not go into details about that. I think from my second paragraph, it's apparent that people have to bend things to the extreme in order to get a figurative account from Genesis. In addition, I recently did a search on Evoltuion vs Creationism and came upon a secular site, whereby they hit on this very issue. There is another post in this forum talking about giving the enemy a weapon, I feel that is exactly what people are doing, when they bend scripture to fit secular viewpoints in order to reconcile the two. It is simply dividing us further, and moving us further away from God, in my humble opinion, and giving non-believers another reason to doubt our God.

The thing I love most about the Bible, is that it is unchanged. Unlike other worldviews, it hasn't morphed to adopt new beliefs, to appease the masses. It is an absolute. A solid bedrock. An immovable foundation of all that is. By comparison, various origin theories have come full circle.

I am not sure why the big scary evolution monster has us quaking so, that we feel the need to go against God's Word. When people warp scripture, that is what they do. Ever heard the saying, "To stand with the world, is to stand against God."? By embracing these things, people are siding with the world. My main issue with this, is that it is not Biblical. As soon as we give ourselves the right to say that one thing in the Bible is figurative, and not literal, we can do it to many, many more, and soon we have a very watered down and confusing version of the truth.

I got very wrapped up in the whole Evolution vs Creationism thing, to the extent that I wasn't really looking for God in it all, at all. I feel that if anything, this is what the Enemy wishes us to do. When we stand before God, He is not going to ask you to prove Evolution or Creationism to Him, He doesn't care about that at all. That is a worldly belief when all He cares about is your Spiritual Character.

At the end of the day, I can honestly say I don't care whether one or the other turns out to be true. I will stick with God, and His account of how the universe came to be as is written in His Book, and you may happily stick to whatever yours is, my main point is please do not lose sight of what He has called us to do. The Outreach and Recovery forums contain a handful of people, compared to those posting here.

Are we called to debate with each other, or to love our neighbours?

All the best, and may God bless you.
Digit

P.S. I should add a disclaimer saying that I am not getting drawn into a debate about anything in this regard. That was not my intention, so if you wish to post asking me to provide sources or links you can save yourself some time, as I'm not going to. Another time, another thread perhaps.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Well I take it as 'figurative' because I think that's the responsible thing to do as an interpreter. I'm not a scientist, and as an unabashedly conservative mouthpiece I have no problem offending people with modern sensibilities.

But a careful reading of the Genesis account reveals there is something bigger at work than a divine revelation of cosmology.

No, instead, the Genesis account is organized to show that God is alone the creator, that God created the universe in an orderly manner, that the universe is declared good by God, that the universe was created purposefully, and that the creations are not divine- all major concerns for Israelites living in the polytheistic Near East.

Look at how the days are structured- with creature-rulers on the first three days and corresponding realms on the next three.

The night and day in the first day, with the sun and moon to rule over them in the fourth day.

The air and sea on the second day, with the birds and sea animals to rule over them in the fifth day.

Dry land on the third day, with the land animals on the sixth.

Very ordered, very purposefully. Not like the chaotic accounts of the Babylonians at all.

So the purposes of the creation account are very much centered on the concerns of God in ancient Israel, and do not constitute a three-thousand year preemptive strike upon modern cosmology.

 

[Jase]

I cannot understand how some people can take the account in Genesis as figurative. I think my main issue with this, is that God not only tells us that He created these things in a period of time, he then defines that time period as a day, and gives it a real world length. It has a morning and an evening. There is nothing in that which can be taken figurativly as far as I can tell. It is a literal account.

Perhaps your problem is that you're reading it from the English viewpoint, as opposed to the Hebrew. Genesis is a lyrical poem, intended to be sung. The use of day, while seemingly obvious from an english perspective is not so in Hebrew. Yom, the hebrew for day means a lot more than a 24 hour period. And just because Genesis refers to a 6 day period, doesn't mean it's how we should apply it. The Hebrews for 1, didn't know any better. Their cosmological view clearly indicates that they believed the Earth to be flat, with a solid dome above it, and stars in the dome. Second, why can't Genesis be used figuratively, to convey a theological point? Why does it have to be a literal 6 days, just because it says it? Can't it be intended to provide the framework for the week and the Sabbath, without actually meaning it took only 6 days?

In fact, I would rather not go into details about that. I think from my second paragraph, it's apparent that people have to bend things to the extreme in order to get a figurative account from Genesis. In addition, I recently did a search on Evoltuion vs Creationism and came upon a secular site, whereby they hit on this very issue. There is another post in this forum talking about giving the enemy a weapon, I feel that is exactly what people are doing, when they bend scripture to fit secular viewpoints in order to reconcile the two. It is simply dividing us further, and moving us further away from God, in my humble opinion, and giving non-believers another reason to doubt our God.

Fundamentalism and literalism do plenty of damage to the cause of Christianity. Taking Genesis literally just makes Christians look stupid to unbelievers. Read Augustine's view on the matter.

The thing I love most about the Bible, is that it is unchanged. Unlike other worldviews, it hasn't morphed to adopt new beliefs, to appease the masses. It is an absolute. A solid bedrock. An immovable foundation of all that is. By comparison, various origin theories have come full circle.

It's hardly unchanged. Just look at the amount of controversy that went in to deciding what scripture goes into our modern Bible. The Catholic church didn't even want to put in Revelation because it was such a bad portrayal of Christ and Christianity, not to mention there is a Jewish Revelation that is far more fitting to the time period that may have been the real revelation. And how can it be a solid bedrock when the Bible has led to such division among Christians? There are 35,000 sects of Christianity in the world, most of which differ in Biblical interpretation.

I am not sure why the big scary evolution monster has us quaking so, that we feel the need to go against God's Word.

Only fundamentalists quake when they hear of evolution because they fear it. Theistic evolutionists have no problem with it, because it has no bearing on being a Christian or not. In fact, most of the world's Christians are evolutionists.

When people warp scripture, that is what they do. Ever heard the saying, "To stand with the world, is to stand against God."? By embracing these things, people are siding with the world.

Accepting the truth of God using evolution to create life's diversity is siding with the world? Evolution is a fact as much as gravity. It is the most well supported theory in history, and is the entire foundation for biology. It has been long known that the world and universe is far older than 6,000 years, and the global flood was disproved by creationists 200 years ago. If accepting these truths are going against God and siding with the world, perhaps you should ask God why his entire creation reveals these facts.

My main issue with this, is that it is not Biblical. As soon as we give ourselves the right to say that one thing in the Bible is figurative, and not literal, we can do it to many, many more, and soon we have a very watered down and confusing version of the truth.

But you do the same thing. Numerous verses in the Bible support a geocentric, flat Earth model. Fundamentalists don't hesitate to interpret them figuratively because it's pretty hard to deny that the Earth is an obloid sphere and revolves around the sun. So why can you interpret those verses figuratively, and still remain true to the Bible, yet we interpret parts of Genesis figuratively, and we are siding with the world?

I got very wrapped up in the whole Evolution vs Creationism thing, to the extent that I wasn't really looking for God in it all, at all. I feel that if anything, this is what the Enemy wishes us to do. When we stand before God, He is not going to ask you to prove Evolution or Creationism to Him, He doesn't care about that at all. That is a worldly belief when all He cares about is your Spiritual Character.

Then why do fundamentalists condemn evolution so much if it makes no difference?

 

[vossler]

And just because Genesis refers to a 6 day period, doesn't mean it's how we should apply it. The Hebrews for 1, didn't know any better. Their cosmological view clearly indicates that they believed the Earth to be flat, with a solid dome above it, and stars in the dome. Second, why can't Genesis be used figuratively, to convey a theological point? Why does it have to be a literal 6 days, just because it says it?

This isn't meant to pick on you specifically Jase but it's when I read things like that from TEs I just have to shake my head in disbelief and ask myself; are we actually reading the same book written by the same author guided by the same spirit? Do we actually believe the same things about God?

The rest of your post does little to change that disturbing revelation.

 

[Dannager]

This isn't meant to pick on you specifically Jase but it's when I read things like that from TEs I just have to shake my head in disbelief and ask myself; are we actually reading the same book written by the same author guided by the same spirit? Do we actually believe the same things about God?

No, clearly we do not. This is not a one-issue divide. This is the symptom of an incredibly wide gap between fundamentalist Christians and non-fundamentalist Christians. We do not believe the same things about God. We do not believe that God works in the same way. We do not believe that God speaks to man in the same way. We do not believe that God created in the same way. We do not believe that God interferes with daily events in the same way.

There are a small few out there who might blur the gap a little, believing some aspects of both sides, but they are the exception rather than the rule. Christianity is not one religion. Denominations aside, there are two religions that are both called Christianity now: fundamentalism, and non-fundamentalism.

 

[vossler]

No, clearly we do not. This is not a one-issue divide. This is the symptom of an incredibly wide gap between fundamentalist Christians and non-fundamentalist Christians. We do not believe the same things about God. We do not believe that God works in the same way. We do not believe that God speaks to man in the same way. We do not believe that God created in the same way. We do not believe that God interferes with daily events in the same way.

There are a small few out there who might blur the gap a little, believing some aspects of both sides, but they are the exception rather than the rule. Christianity is not one religion. Denominations aside, there are two religions that are both called Christianity now: fundamentalism, and non-fundamentalism.

I rarely agree with you Dannager, but on this post I couldn't agree more. Well said!

 

[gluadys]

The thing I love most about the Bible, is that it is unchanged. Unlike other worldviews, it hasn't morphed to adopt new beliefs, to appease the masses. It is an absolute. A solid bedrock. An immovable foundation of all that is. By comparison, various origin theories have come full circle.

Strictly speaking, the Bible has changed. The Septuagint bible exists in several versions and is the basis for the Catholic bible. The Jewish rabbinic canon was established after the first publication of the Septuagint, excludes some portions of the Septuagint, and is the basis for the Protestant bible. Furthermore, since we no longer have the original manuscripts of any part of the bible, the discovery of ancient texts has led to textual changes when it became clear that some parts of the text had been added or changed through scribal error.

On a broader basis, the intepretation of the Bible has changed enormously over time. The bible was once used to justify a feudal social order. Today (depending on your politics) it is used to justify a capitalist or socialist social order. The bible was once used to defend geocentrism, but is rarely so used today. In fact, most literalists claim that the bible doesn't support geocentrism at all. The bible was once used to justify slavery, but is now almost universally seen to condemn it.

So even if the text of the bible is unchanging, what the meaning of the text is changes a lot.

 

[crawfish]

This isn't meant to pick on you specifically Jase but it's when I read things like that from TEs I just have to shake my head in disbelief and ask myself; are we actually reading the same book written by the same author guided by the same spirit? Do we actually believe the same things about God?

The rest of your post does little to change that disturbing revelation.

Did you read my post in the TE forum on "How do TE's read the bible?" I think a lot of these problems have more to do with our approach to bible scholarship rather than our personal views on scholarship. I'd really be interested in what creationists have to say about it.

As to what Jase posted, understand that there is a Psalm (can't remember which right now) where each line begins with a letter of the Hebrew alphabet, in order; that's a literary device we use even today. The ancient Hebrews were very capable of using literary conventions like that in their writings. Genesis is FULL of literary conventions - for instance, there are words in the original language used that are not normal; they are used for alliteration, rhyme, etc.

I'd highly recommend this lecture:

http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursedesclong2.aspx?cid=6234&id=6234&pc=Religion

It's a bit expensive right now, but they do have sales every month and I've seen the audio download for as cheap as $50. The professor, a scholar of Jewish studies and an expert in the Hebrew language, talks about Genesis as literature, and it is brilliant. He speaks from a believer's perspective as well, albeit a Jewish one.

 

[busterdog]

I am not sure why the big scary evolution monster has us quaking so, that we feel the need to go against God's Word. When people warp scripture, that is what they do. Ever heard the saying, "To stand with the world, is to stand against God."? By embracing these things, people are siding with the world. My main issue with this, is that it is not Biblical. As soon as we give ourselves the right to say that one thing in the Bible is figurative, and not literal, we can do it to many, many more, and soon we have a very watered down and confusing version of the truth.

If you do enough of this debating stuff in your own strength and "wisdom" as a human being, I think you end up exactly where you find your problem. That's my experience anyway.

Without asking anyone to admit that TE is wrong, the battle is not ours, fundamentally. If the battle is the Lords, it can be fought with less need to vindicate our own interpretations.

That is not to say that I condone an evolutionary view, but if I fight it with weapons other than my own, whatever error is in my own thinking is much less of a problem.

As David said to Goliath,

1Sa 17:47 And all this assembly shall know that the LORD saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle [is] the LORD'S, and he will give you into our hands.

Jud 1:9
Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

 

[theIdi0t]

This isn't meant to pick on you specifically Jase but it's when I read things like that from TEs I just have to shake my head in disbelief and ask myself; are we actually reading the same book written by the same author guided by the same spirit? Do we actually believe the same things about God?

The rest of your post does little to change that disturbing revelation.

I don't see why you find it as disturbing, the question must be asked of our beloveds: Is Genesis there for us to find meaning, to draw closer to God, and is this more important than literalism?

Do you understand that sometimes when one focuses on the literal he loses the meaning?

When I hear of Genesis from a literalist, it seems hallow to me, stripped of it's beauty. I don't need the wood that Noah built the ark from, nor do I need to find Lot composed of salt, what I need to find is God's friend Abraham.

I don't need a multimillion dollar creationist museum, I would rather see that money used to build wells in Africa.

If literalism is what leads me to the former pursuits, than you can have it.

And if one's God is more pleased by the former, and not the latter, than we do not serve the same God.

 

[juvenissun]

Without asking anyone to admit that TE is wrong, the battle is not ours, fundamentally. If the battle is the Lords, it can be fought with less need to vindicate our own interpretations.

The debate between YEC and OEC is mostly for fun and learning.
But the debate between YEC, OEC, TE and atheists are not for fun:

Atheist: Evolution is true, so there is no God.
OE, TE: Yes, evolution is true.
YE: ???, hey, I thought we are on the same side.

So, we are debating.

 

[crawfish]

The debate between YEC and OEC is mostly for fun and learning.
But the debate between YEC, OEC, TE and atheists are not for fun:

Atheist: Evolution is true, so there is no God.
OE, TE: Yes, evolution is true.
YE: ???, hey, I thought we are on the same side.

So, we are debating.

Looks like some pretty faulty reasoning on the extremes.

 

[Jase]

The debate between YEC and OEC is mostly for fun and learning.
But the debate between YEC, OEC, TE and atheists are not for fun:

Atheist: Evolution is true, so there is no God.
OE, TE: Yes, evolution is true.
YE: ???, hey, I thought we are on the same side.

So, we are debating.

OE creationists don't accept evolution.

The atheist argument is also faulty. They don't say Evolution is true, therefore God doesn't exist. They say, "Evolution is true. There also happens to be zero evidence for the existence of God, and even contradictory evidence for the Christian God ( such as evil, unanswered prayers, contradictions etc.)"

Atheists don't use evolution to counter God, they use other problems.

 

[Assyrian]

The debate between YEC and OEC is mostly for fun and learning.
But the debate between YEC, OEC, TE and atheists are not for fun:

Atheist: Evolution is true, so there is no God.
OE, TE: Yes, evolution is true.
YE: ???, hey, I thought we are on the same side.

So, we are debating.

Atheist: Evolution is true, so there is no God.
YE, OE: If Evolution is true, there is no God.
TE: ???, hey, I thought you weren't on the same side.

TE: Evolution is true, isn't God amazingly clever.

 

[juvenissun]

Atheist: Evolution is true, so there is no God.
YE, OE: If Evolution is true, there is no God.
TE: ???, hey, I thought you weren't on the same side.

TE: Evolution is true, isn't God amazingly clever.

Ha ha ha ...
Thanks. It is good.